One great anesthesia group

Recently, Mark Soderstrom wrote that he was concerned that there was only one anesthesia group in Medford. When I came to practice surgery in Medford 35 years ago, one of the major drawing points was the excellence of anesthesia. Now that I am retired, I am able to travel the world on surgical humanitarian missions, and my major concern is how good my anesthesiologist will be for the children.

With one group in Medford, there is excellent peer review and congeniality among the doctors. One may think that if there is only one group prices are controlled. This is a common misconception among the public, as all doctor fees are controlled by the government and insurance companies.

Thus, if a doctor works on a person without insurance, he or she does not "make it up on the paying customer," but simply provides excellent free medical care regardless of ability to pay.

We are very fortunate to have outstanding anesthesiologists in this community, and they are careful to select new doctors with excellent credentials and training. — Ron Worland, M.D., Medford

Coverage was biased

It used to be the public could depend on network and printed news for unbiased, truthful and informative political information about candidates and issues. When did reporters stop doing their job?

Editors and newscasters used to keep their opinions and biases to themselves. When did they start trying to influence our vote? Decisions on who to vote for should be left up to us.

Example: The De Fazio/Robinson "hit piece" on Oct. 28 was full of misinformation, half-truths and unanswered questions.

You're supposed to be our watchdogs, our providers of accurate information so that we can make informed decisions. Our party affiliation shouldn't matter, and neither should yours. The public has a right to expect you as publishers of political information to be objective. As paying customers of your newspaper, we deserve unbiased information from you.

Print and network television stations are wondering why the public is abandoning them. When are all of you going to wake up and take a good look at what you are doing? — Dianna Cody, Applegate

Mother Nature voting early

Two billion dollars have been spent on both campaigns. What are Big Oil, Coal, and status-quo energy interests getting in return? Sandy!

Seems Mama Nature is doing her own early voting on the "climate change hoax," and what we can expect in her first, not to mention her longer, term. Her campaign is generating lots of reconstruction, housing and infrastructure jobs for years to come, and one whale of a lot of government spending.

Her campaign's been none too subtle for decades, although too few of us have been paying much attention. Maybe this news-dominating event will leapfrog the others' nonstop TV ads, putting her agenda high in the polls? (I figure, North and South poles for sure; those currently melting in our direction and heating up the race ... the human race anyway).

Think we'll do anything? Or that she'll just have her way with us? — Rob Hirschboeck, Ashland

Rescuers went bravely

I'm glad the White House's inner circle didn't have the call on the rescue of the Bounty as our rescuers went bravely into harm's way. — Jerry Sawtelle, Medford

Reader Reaction
We reserve the right to remove any content at any time from this Community, including without limitation if it violates the Community Rules. We ask that you report content that you in good faith believe violates the above rules by clicking the Flag link next to the offending comment or fill out this form. New comments are only accepted for two weeks from the date of publication.